Re: [GSoC][PATCH 2/4] submodule--helper: introduce for_each_submodule_list()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 22, 2017, 22:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqefs31b73.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20170821161515.23775-2-pc44800@gmail.com>
Prathamesh Chavan <pc44800@gmail.com> writes:
> -static void init_submodule(const char *path, const char *prefix, int quiet) > +static void for_each_submodule_list(const struct module_list list, > + submodule_list_func_t fn, void *cb_data)
It may not be wrong per-se, but can't this just be for_each_submodule()?
Your "justification" may be that this makes it clear that you are iterating over module_list and not other kind of group of submodules, but I would say the design of the subsystem is broken if some places use a list of submodules while some other places use an array of submodules to represent a group of submodules. Especially when there is a dedicated type to hold a group of submodules, i.e. struct module-list, that type should be used consistently throughout the subsystem and API, no?
Show 5 quoted lines
> {
> + int i;
> + for (i = 0; i < list.nr; i++)
> + fn(list.entries[i], cb_data);
> +}Also, did you really want to pass the structure by value? At least in C, it is more customary to pass these things by pointer, i.e.
for_each_submodule(struct module_list *list,
for_each_submodule_fn fn,
void *cb_data)
{
for (i = 0; i < list->nr; i++)
...Otherwise you'd be making a copy on stack unnecessarily (ok, "const" might hint a smart compiler to turn this inefficient code to pass it by pointer, but I do not think it is a particulary good to rely on such things).